New Submarines

[cheap]

Plans are be drawn up for a new batch of submarines to replace the ageing and problematic Collins class submarines.

Front runner to the replacement seems to be 10 new high tech Japanese Soryu class submarines. These seem to be the best non nuclear submarines in the world. Good so far, but then along comes the highly emotive rhetoric:

1) we will sink any sub not built locally
2) remember WW2
3) threat to Australia's security

Now some people have short memories, because

A) building submarine locally wasn't exactly a good endeavour, i.e. Collins class
a) massive budget blowouts
b) subs which were and still are problematic to maintain and keep at sea
c) subs which are not actually much good due to their ability to generate a lot of noise whilst underwater
d) as for sinking any sub not built locally, I think the Collins class is a self fulfilling prophecy in the respect

B) WW2
a) you know the argument is on thin ice when the old WW2 chestnut gets mentioned
b) we seem to have no problem using other Japanese products, TV's, watches and Cars

C) threat to national security
a) admittedly this one has me a little confused, I would have thought having 10 working Soryu submarines would be better for national security that 5 so-so Collins class submarines
b) we have twice as many subs in half the time to build locally

Here I was thinking the objective is to have a reasonable defence capability.

We buy warplanes from the USA, ships from Spain, tanks from the USA and we don't get anywhere near the rhetoric, so what's the problem buying Japanese submarines?

Personally instead of buying submarines I would ask the USA if they'd be prepared to lease 10 nuclear powered submarines to the RAN for 20 years.

So what's the big deal?

[Cashie]

With the US's reduced defence spending, there's very little chance they'd be loaning or leasing us much capital hardware these days.
I think sadly it is a smart move, we have proven that we can't sustain an effective and efficient ship building (more so submarine building) industry. It's the economy of scale, you can't setup ship building and only have work for them periodically.
Anyone who has spent time in a US shipyard will see there are almost no parallels to anything we have here. These days South Korea, Singapore, Japan etc are key players in ship building, why not get value for money and a quality product.
Sadly this means our workers suffer, the government should as part of this purchase setup a process to assist this work force to transition into another industry with a future.
Also, the failure of the Collins can not be solely blamed on Adelaide and the builders, this project was flawed before one piece of steel was cut, building an unproven and previously unbuilt submarine here was always a huge risk, the submarine design had major flaws and the combat system didn't work (both issues now largely resolved).

[cs123]

I can understand choosing the Japanese option if they are half price.

The other side of the coin is what are we doing to keep skilled manufacturing jobs this country? It is not sustainable the path we are on.

[XR6TCraig]

Figures being splashed around suggest they are more like one third the price. Considering that we arent flush with cash, this seems a logical economic decision.
Now if it only cost 20% more then perhaps I could understand those complaining about this, but even then, the Japanese subs are a proven product that would be a superior to one built by casual Aussie ship builders.

[Maka]

Imo we need these import subs now, our commercial & industrial ship building concerns should come second to any urgent security / military need. No brainer!

cheers, Maka

[whishy]

Originally Posted by cs123

I can understand choosing the Japanese option if they are half price.

The other side of the coin is what are we doing to keep skilled manufacturing jobs this country? It is not sustainable the path we are on.

Never going to keep skilled jobs in this country when Unions are fighting for $60 an hour labour rates with 1.5 or 2x penalty rates... Its just not sustainable.

[Road_Warrior]

Originally Posted by cheap

b) subs which ... still are problematic to maintain and keep at sea
c) subs which are not actually much good due to their ability to generate a lot of noise whilst underwater

According to who?

The biggest issue with the Collins boats in recent years has been having enough crew to put one to sea.

As for the Soryu class, there are a number of issues with choosing this vessel:

1) doesn't have the range of the Collins class
2) doesn't have a VLS for land-attack missiles (Defence wants land attack capability)
3) Japan intends to start removing them from service roughly the same time we start introducing them
4) They might be the bees knees now, but by 2025-2030 they won't be.

Far better to choose a design like the German Type 216 that already meets the spec and mission parameter and has advanced technologies that arent yet mainstream so that the subs have a technological edge over any potential future adversary.

As for building them here...well...uhh...I dunno. Where are they getting these costs from? The other day someone bandied around a cost of "between $50 Billion and $80 Billion" but with no proof. Sounds like a red herring to me. I think the deal has already been done...

[Charliewool]

Governments (both persuasions) seem to have NO idea when it comes to large capital expenditure!
Look at examples like Vic's desal plant.. Their latest choice in fighter jets... Even freeways! They'll build a 2 lane freeway which is fine today.. and within 3 years it's grid-locked.. Then there will be another 3 years of traffic mayhem as they decide to add a lane or 2!
They never ever look to the future, it's always NOW while they're in power.
It's always NOW, to win votes...
AND in the subs case "look how much we saved" when in fact, by the time the things are delivered they are totally out-dated junk! (and the price has meanwhile, blown out to the shizenhousin!)
Politicians (who are usually just ex-teachers or trade unionists) should NOT be making these multimillion dollar spending decisions..
They get wined and dined (plus, God knows what OTHER incentives?) by these overseas multinationals to buy their 2nd rate junk, without having a friggen clue of the product or it's technology.

[Itsme]

Originally Posted by Charliewool

Governments (both persuasions) seem to have NO idea when it comes to large capital expenditure!
Look at examples like Vic's desal plant.. Their latest choice in fighter jets... Even freeways! They'll build a 2 lane freeway which is fine today.. and within 3 years it's grid-locked.. Then there will be another 3 years of traffic mayhem as they decide to add a lane or 2!
They never ever look to the future, it's always NOW while they're in power.
It's always NOW, to win votes...
AND in the subs case "look how much we saved" when in fact, by the time the things are delivered they are totally out-dated junk! (and the price has meanwhile, blown out to the shizenhousin!)
Politicians (who are usually just ex-teachers or trade unionists) should NOT be making these multimillion dollar spending decisions..
They get wined and dined (plus, God knows what OTHER incentives?) by these overseas multinationals to buy their 2nd rate junk, without having a friggen clue of the product or it's technology.

When it come to military hardware purchases it is usually purchased on the recommendation of the military chiefs decisions as to what they really want, the only bit the govco stuffs up is whether manufactured overseas or here depending on cost outlay.

[mik]

Too my way of thinking, we should continue to build our own subs, people worry to much about meeting budgets, if it costs more tuff, if it takes a bit longer to perfect, tuff.
We have thrown away so many jobs and industry to become a country that's makes almost nothing and buys from other countrys what often turns out to be expensive rubbish.
We then have to pay for country x to train us how to use their crap when we already now how our own crap works, and Iit won'tcost billions to service it and get parts.

[CoupeKing]

Being geographically isolated and surrounded by water, our aim should be to get the best subs!!!! Be it acquired or made here. Same goes with our planes and Army. Small, but better equipped and trained. And if that fails just text Obama for help.

[Road_Warrior]

Originally Posted by mik

Too my way of thinking, we should continue to build our own subs, people worry to much about meeting budgets, if it costs more tuff, if it takes a bit longer to perfect, tuff.
We have thrown away so many jobs and industry to become a country that's makes almost nothing and buys from other countrys what often turns out to be expensive rubbish.
We then have to pay for country x to train us how to use their crap when we already now how our own crap works, and Iit won'tcost billions to service it and get parts.

Not for $80 Billion we shouldn't.

Look I want to support local industry as well, and I think there should be an option on the table to build them locally as a first-pass option not a last resort, but if those costs are in fact true, then we have a massive problem with costs in this country.

I should add that the tens of billions figure being bandied around is not the individual unit price per sub (i.e. 80 billion divided by 10 subs) it is the total lifecycle costs of the subs, plus the subs themselves.

[PridenJoy]

I agree that the Jap subs would not be fit for the purpose we need them for for reasons already mentioned, and that we need a more advanced and capable alternative to serve us well into the future. Whether that is built here or sourced from overseas all depends on the value for money proposition, as long as what we are getting is indeed what we need well into the future, not just a platform that 'will do'.

And Collins subs are no where near as bad as people think, they are a world class sub which can cause real damage if need be whilst being quite stealthy. They just don't have any crew for them, because Navy boys and girls seem to be too claustrophobic not having a dig at them, I wouldn't go into one for months on end either.

[Bossxr8]

Apparently the name of the Jap subs, was the name of a WWII aircraft carrier that launched planes that bombed Darwin.

It would be an absolute slap in the face of our veterans if we purchased them, considering the name was used to "honour" the carrier that killed our people.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by Charliewool

Governments (both persuasions) seem to have NO idea when it comes to large capital expenditure!
Look at examples like Vic's desal plant.. Their latest choice in fighter jets... Even freeways! They'll build a 2 lane freeway which is fine today.. and within 3 years it's grid-locked.. Then there will be another 3 years of traffic mayhem as they decide to add a lane or 2!
They never ever look to the future, it's always NOW while they're in power.
It's always NOW, to win votes...
AND in the subs case "look how much we saved" when in fact, by the time the things are delivered they are totally out-dated junk! (and the price has meanwhile, blown out to the shizenhousin!)
Politicians (who are usually just ex-teachers or trade unionists) should NOT be making these multimillion dollar spending decisions..
They get wined and dined (plus, God knows what OTHER incentives?) by these overseas multinationals to buy their 2nd rate junk, without having a friggen clue of the product or it's technology.

The other option is a direct democracy where we as voters get to vote on all choices, instead of representative where we elect people to make these choices for us.

Or i can be the evil communist dictator, I'm willing to do that for everyone out of the good of my heart

[Road_Warrior]

The government doesn’t appear to be listening to what anyone says, and seems determined to try and leverage Australia’s new Free-Trade Agreement with Japan as well as build a political bloc to offset the rise of China. Buying Japanese submarines will no doubt give China the *****, but we should care less about what China thinks about our defence procurement. Stuff China. But Tony Abbott said last week that industry policy should not determine or dictate defence policy. In my view it cuts both ways Tony, you shouldn’t let foreign policy dictate or influence defence procurement.

[BHDOGS]

Its the typical bull**** Australia does oh it saves money its ok when its not my job thats being lost oh its ok when its not my tax dollars being wasted oh people on centre link are such a drain why cant they get jobs! well heres one ******* example why not. As typical of this bull**** country we live in were selling out souls for dollars while sending our kids futures offshore to save a couple of bucks for some rich cashed up twats to negative gear there house instead of spending money on something that could actually be ******* useful and built here.

[karj]

Clarke and Dawe on Submarines

[mcnews]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

Apparently the name of the Jap subs, was the name of a WWII aircraft carrier that launched planes that bombed Darwin.

It would be an absolute slap in the face of our veterans if we purchased them, considering the name was used to "honour" the carrier that killed our people.

I think any digger would instead say by the best we can afford that can help try to prevent any more of our people dying in war.

[mcnews]

Originally Posted by mik

Too my way of thinking, we should continue to build our own subs, people worry to much about meeting budgets, if it costs more tuff, if it takes a bit longer to perfect, tuff.
We have thrown away so many jobs and industry to become a country that's makes almost nothing and buys from other countrys what often turns out to be expensive rubbish.
We then have to pay for country x to train us how to use their crap when we already now how our own crap works, and Iit won'tcost billions to service it and get parts.

Australia can't seem to build anything right. The Collins disaster should ensure it is never again attempted here.

[Franco Cozzo]

Maybe we build something under license, so we pretty much just assemble it locally rather than attempting to design something.

Keep people in jobs and still get something good as well.

If there's something I've learned in my short stint in manufacturing, don't try to modify something for what it was never designed to do, it just turns into an unreliable expensive failure.

[ltd]

Originally Posted by BHDOGS

Its the typical bull**** Australia does oh it saves money its ok when its not my job thats being lost oh its ok when its not my tax dollars being wasted oh people on centre link are such a drain why cant they get jobs! well heres one ******* example why not. As typical of this bull**** country we live in were selling out souls for dollars while sending our kids futures offshore to save a couple of bucks for some rich cashed up twats to negative gear there house instead of spending money on something that could actually be ******* useful and built here.

Why don't you tell us how you really feel?

[DoreSlamR]

The Collins class subs are much better than what some will have you believe, yes they had their issues for sure, but when fully operational, they managed to avoid a fleet of US ships and subs during exercises a few years back, the yanks even tried to cheat and still couldn't find the Aussie sub.

[Bill M]

It would be easier to accept a Japanese designed sub class named Soryu if there was a genuine attempt at coming to terms with their wartime horrors by the Japanese themselves. Some nations have long memories.

Nice to read of real world comments on the performance of the Collins class subs other than recycled rubbish from an ill informed media.

Can anyone show with evidence a defense project that was actually trouble free, on-time and on budget from any where in the world ?

[Itsme]

Originally Posted by mcnews

Australia can't seem to build anything right. The Collins disaster should ensure it is never again attempted here.

What makes you think Collins submarine are a disaster, sure there was a few bugs 1st up but they are a very good submarine that deserves recognition for their capabilities.

As mentioned by others a lot of defense projects do have their problems world wide.

[Bill M]

Originally Posted by mcnews

Australia can't seem to build anything right. The Collins disaster should ensure it is never again attempted here.

Submarines seem to be a difficult proposition no matter who builds them...

http://www.gao.gov/products/NSIAD-93-171

http://www.lowyinterpreter.org/post/...CC=2201945102&


http://rt.com/usa/navy-delays-comiss...submarine-200/

http://breakingdefense.com/2014/04/n...tube-troubles/

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/d...stute-problems

[Road_Warrior]

Collins was a disaster at the beginning and in the early years of their lives for a number of reasons:

1) Selecting a design that was optimised for patrol work in the cold, shallow waters of the Baltic sea, instead of one for long range operations with the huge distances our subs have to cover

2) Taking the said design (which was the Kockums Type 471 btw) which was optimised for the above conditions and was a 1900 ton design, and upscaling it so that it would fit the RAN's spec and operational parameters (so long ranges and it ended up being 3300 tons)

3) Trying to reinvent the wheel themselves when it was totally unnecessary with that oddball "Combat Control System" that even the US Navy didn't have and said we didn't need. This ended up being 30% of the overall cost of the boats

4) Changing the requirements in the middle of crucial project milestones

5) Poor project management and oversight (refer 4 above)

6) Crap hardware

7) We've never built subs in Australia and the shipyard didn't exist prior to these submarines. Where did the skills and knowledge come from? Other yards or did everyone start from scratch?

It cost a ****eload of cash to make the Collins boats as good as they are now. They are at the stage where the RAN can once again be relied on for eavesdropping off certain asian countries to our north and they are none the wiser...

[bungarra]

Originally Posted by DoreSlamR

The Collins class subs are much better than what some will have you believe, yes they had their issues for sure, but when fully operational, they managed to avoid a fleet of US ships and subs during exercises a few years back, the yanks even tried to cheat and still couldn't find the Aussie sub.

Also managed to sit off the coast of China and follow their nuke subs without detection. One even got close enough to Hainan Island Sub Base to take photos thorugh the periscope of the access in the cliff face for the sub base as the yanks couldn't find where the China nukes were departing from before the Chinese sub hunters were on top of them.

We nearly lost two saiors on one operation off the Chinese coast as the sub got in nice and close and got caught in Chinese fishing nets in rough seas.

The German 212 class subs would be the best replacement for the C boats. They have proven long range capabilities, Israel sailed thier version form Hamburg to the Gulf and sat of Iran and did elint work and then went to Israel on their shake down cruise. Ran under the Iranian patrol vessels and multi national fleets operating in the gulf without detection.

[mcnews]

Originally Posted by DoreSlamR

The Collins class subs are much better than what some will have you believe, yes they had their issues for sure, but when fully operational, they managed to avoid a fleet of US ships and subs during exercises a few years back, the yanks even tried to cheat and still couldn't find the Aussie sub.

We did that with outdated o boats too, got in an took photographs of the carrier props turning, but that was so embarrassing it was kept hush hush.

[SB076]

Collins had issues at the start, but I believe they have been rectified. Considering we would have learnt a lot during the process it seems painful to throw that all away and simply purchase subs from overseas.